On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> I'm afraid that the goals of this patch might be similarly obsolete.
>> No, I don't think so. IIUC, the problem is that EXPLAIN ANALYZE runs
>> the rewrite products with different snapshot handling than the regular
>> execution path.
> Possibly, but it's not clear to me that this patch fixes that.
> As I said, it's no longer obvious what the patch means to do, and I'd
> like a clear statement of that.
Fair enough. I assume Marko will provide that shortly. I believe the
consensus was to make the regular case behave like EXPLAIN ANALYZE
rather than the other way around...
>> So in theory you could turn on auto_explain and have
>> the semantics of your queries change. That would be Bad.
> That's just FUD. auto_explain doesn't run EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
Oh, woops. I stand corrected. But I guess the query might behave
differently with and without EXPLAIN ANALYZE?
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2011-02-28 19:17:02|
|Subject: Re: Sync Rep v17|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-02-28 19:03:43|
|Subject: Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies |